zip down only 9 degrees celsius in bucharest by tuesday, the farther north this a much milder, uncommon picture certainly for britain and the island of island temperatures picking up in places like london with plenty in the way of sunshine. and that will extend across into the low countries sunshine coming in for an for a 10 degrees celsius, high pressure in charge across scandinavia. so more in the way of sunshine on she stay at she whether update. ah, the from the al jazeera london, gro casenita to people in thoughtful conversation with no host and no limitations. what is even more in p me that now is system innovation? systems design and system transformation part one of human rights activist, q, me, nighty, and environmentally. when own electric, i lived as you have the fossil fuel arrow my entire life, and i'm looking for

a graceful transition out of it. studio b unscripted on out his era. simon will join nato within days ending its long held neutrality after russia's invasion of ukraine. now just a handful of european nations remain militarily non aligned. so does neutrality still work? does it still matter? or is it an outdated concept in today's world? this is inside story. ah, i am several than yea. neutrality is under threat according to its advocates. for its opponents however, it's a luxury that european states can no longer afford. and the war in ukraine has put more focus on countries such as switzerland, ireland, and austria, who remain non align militarily. now those countries have sanctioned russia,

but they're not getting involved in the conflict, not sending weapons or personnel to the battlefield. sweden and finland are going the other way. once bastions of neutrality, they have applied to join nato, with defense to become members in the next few days. in a few moments we'll be discussing with our guests what utility means in today's europe, uncle. so sheriff begins our conversation. finan will formerly join our lines in the coming days, a move that would en finland's decades long neutral status. it comes in the face of a perceived security risk after russia invaded ukraine last year, prompting historically neutral european countries to review their policy of non alignment. finland, which borders russia and neighboring sweden, jointly applied for nato membership in may. while health and case bid has been ratified, stockholm is yet to get approval from turkey and hungry or ours agree that the

rapid conclusion of the ratification process for sweden will be in every once interests all forward to also welcoming sweden as a full member of the natal family as soon as possible. only a handful of european nations remained militarily neutral, bound by the constitution or tradition, notably, switzerland, austria, ireland, and malta live all imposed sanctions and rochelle football in ukraine. the former yugoslavia was one of the founders of the known ally movement and today serbia remains neutral. so does former soviet state, moldova, last month, the far right politician stage to walk out when ukraine preston loaded me as ellen ski addressed the austrian parliament saying it violated the country's neutral stamps. some liberal politicians criticized their actions from present instance landscape also in parliament. of course,

president lensky speech is compatible with our neutrality. he is also spoken in other neutral you states in ireland, in cyprus, in malta. but there are no party turns back on the people of ukraine, the shameful that our freedom party is behaving in this way of real shame. to defer at least major was founded in 1949 by 12 nations, and has grown to include per team member states. moscow has been long opposed to be alliances, expansion, and use, but it called keith's natal ambitions. as a pretext for invading ukraine. when we consume sharif onto 0 for inside story, the, we have got a great panel to discuss all of this. let's welcome our guests in healthcare in helsinki you already out of one is finland's former under secretary of state for you affairs. now the chairman of the european center of excellence for countering hybrid threats in geneva. so mechanically, a specialist on the military policies of neutral and non aligned european states.

you're also head of global and emerging risks at the geneva center for security policy. and joining us dublin today, richard boyd, barren member of the irish parliament, the doyle, your head of the people before profit party, you're also a leading figure of the irish anti war movements. welcome to all of you gentlemen. you already, i'll start with you. is it possible to remain neutral in today's europe or has that ship sailed? well, depends on how you define new trial it to you say, after 2 wars with the soviet union, we have to build strong own defense. and we have to adopt neutrality to, to so live. but we believe that by joining the european union in 1995, we no longer have been politically new drug. and now we're joining the defense

alliance in order to never be alone again. richard, your voice of islands, anti war movement. as we said at the top, you're a staunch defender of neutrality. how did you feel when you saw a bastion of neutrality like finland, switch sides. and i like to join the military lines. yeah, it was very disappointing. and, and i think it's part of the process of the militarization of europe and, and the expansion of danger. and it's certainly been used by our governments, as has the terrible conflict in ukraine as an opportunity for those who want to move ireland away from neutrality and towards the project of marriage for i zation are in europe and closer to nato. and so, but that is something that i would say,

the vast majority of people in ireland oppose an irish neutrality is very deeply embedded in the irish psyche. because it really is linked to the revolutionary movement for independence in this country, which was presently a movement against the british empire and against the 1st world war. so it, it, but irish independence if you like, as deeply in, intertwined with the idea of not aligning with big military powers. but you, her, your, to your right. and he said something very compelling. he said at some point we needed to make sure we would never be alone again and on a on, on a basic fundamental level. i think that will appeal to a lot of people. we can all understand that. well, on the contrary, i think, and if you're neutral at, you're less likely to be a target for hostile military action. when, if you involve yourselves in nato or in the european project of militarization,

you're then involved in essentially mutual defense at parts. which means that if somebody else goes to war, you're then involved and potentially can become a target. and that is something certainly i oppose. i posed militarization and war generally. and while i absolutely, and i think the vast majority of people in this country are poor. what vladimir putin as dawning ukraine. it is a on justifiable and murderous at a sold on the people of ukraine. but equally, we've seen in recent years the united states, u. k. involved in equally unjustifiable murderous wars, particularly in iraq. and it's certainly our view that we shouldn't involve ourselves with any of these big imperial powers. but i have to say in truth,

there's elements in the irish governments who would like to pushes away from neutrality and involve those in nature. and the project of you mother tries ation. okay. and, and we'll get back to those, jody, i'm sure you have lots of things to answer, but let me bring a rich amok into this conversation. set a straight on mac is neutrality. even the word we should be using here because we just heard richard wright who wants to remain on the line who wants to, who does not want island to militarize. but richard did not sound neutral to me. he says, he abhors what is going on in, in ukraine, and it is an unjust war that is happening that those are not the words of somebody who says, i'm going to remain equidistant from both sides, ukraine and russia. you know, i don't have an opinion. that's not what i just heard. i'm not sure neutral is the word really that defines island, austria, malta, e u. countries like that. actually concept fatality, either concept that is a specific posture of space,

the candidate frame policy. and basically, the little picture ality of my tino 7 up to hague has some duties and duties pretends to abstaining from providing military support to either to either site to be impress, impartial, meaning they have to treat the belligerent equally as a duty also or prevention. so the neutral states have to maintain military on the territory to guarantee they sovereignty. and so what we hear here here is that, that there, that the previous speakers concept, a petrovitch is very much linked to passive is but natal, it has nothing to do with the traveler to actually because of the, to, to the trolley, to maintain the integrity of your to reach re, if you look at the new toaster, nicole or sweden spindle and, and switzerland. they had a big military. and what is important to note is that neutrality,

me and abstaining for me to re support or be entangled in others war, but doesn't mean neutrality of valley and be island to be, or 3 or, or switzerland. the government's very early in the price is completing allied with the position of de west neutrality. he has to be understood as a tool of security policy doc, basically private neutral states. from part cpa think in i was war you already. i see you silently acquiescing. can you tell us a little bit about the journey given that you were part of the foreign policy establishment in finland, the journey of finland from neutrality to the gray area of being an e. u. member state. and now to actually requesting membership of the nato military alliance. you know, we have 1340 kilometer long border with roster former formerly soviet union and it's always been attracting the

pragmatic thinking and breath magic choice for finland. how to arrange our security. we had a long national debate for a 20 so so about nader membership. and when ross act act, your grain, the public obedience soon turned for supporting them in the sick. we believe that nato membership will strengthen our security and improve stability and security in the whole about exceed region. and when finland of sweden will join the threshold for using military force in about exceed region will actually arise and not create new stuff realty. and i think many of my colleagues and friends also felt that the

world became more dangerous. and divided between or tera, tara, and countries and free democrats. it's like, like our last, also about choosing sipes and. and it was really a strong signal from fulton when he was saying that the european security system should be changed. so that nato gives guarantees of non enlargement, so that russ's bordering guns nations would lose their own right to choose how they wish to organize their security. and did public opinion in finland switch just overnight on the 23rd 24th of february 2022 or was it a process? it happened within

a couple of months i would say. and i, i feel that i think there was this silence acceptance that perhaps nato membership would be the best option. but, and then, then it broke out and, and the political leadership actually, in my opinion, followed what the public was already saying. i'm thinking, okay, i'd like to know from all of you if you feel there is pressure on neutral countries to choose sides. richard let's, let's go to you. do you feel island is being pressured as one of the handful of countries that is holding out without a shadow? the downstairs major pressure on the pressure is not just external, but even the european union with the various treason that have advanced the projects of european militarization, the development of battle groups, the development of pasco, all of which certainly i would see as it steps towards the development of

a european army and there certainly the central right parties in irelands, i think, are very keen to involve bulls in that process. and they work from posing to a very large extent move of finland, join nato. and i think we're hoping that both the cranium and crisis and the conflict in ukraine is a lever that they are trying to use to, to push our limbs towards that project, to view militarization and closer alignment with nato. but i'm and boy is, are you hearing that richard? are you hearing that when you meet either diplomats european diplomats in dublin or when you meet representatives from european parties, which i'm sure happens see regularly to they say to you, hey ireland, what are you doing? we need you on board yet they're subtle about as big as they understand it is

a very sensitive issue. but certainly, since the ukrainian and crisis develop since the russian invasion at which i repeat, it's something you know, the vast majority of people in ireland, including myself, absolutely a poor. it's appalling. what putin as don't in ukraine, but to my minds i am, i think, to the, to the mind the majority of people that is not a reason to get involved in a project of militarization. but there is no doubters at in the government. and in europe there is pressure being put on ireland to further involve itself in the project to be you militarization. and indeed, i would say breaches of neutrality, annette and that tend to align ireland with particularly the western block has been a long standing project of the ours government's most terribly. in my view, with the ad decision of the arch goldman to allow about 2000000

u. s. troops to go through an irish, aaron ford on route to the war in iraq, which caused huge protest in this world. because people failed, rightly in my opinion, there was an enormous breach of irish neutrality, right? there have been exceptions in recent history. it's the islands you try with the iraq is one of them. afghan stan also comes up as one of the examples. omar, tell us about switzerland because switzerland is in switzerland, is known for what a handful of things, chocolates, watches, then you transients famous for that. now, infamous, infamous for neutrality, certainly from the perspective of other e. u. member states. um, and recently switzerland actually switzerland's neutrality got in the way of other european countries helping to arm ukraine. tell us about that. well, yeah. so basically the, the swiss councils metrology strongly evolved from the cold war, where basically, the switzerland did not part any political organization. and the 1st cold war,

basically switzerland allied, its slope, trolley t, u. and so basically, if the security council decides on chapter 7, measures to enforce a b to reaction. now, switzerland will complain that what happened with ukraine is that also over time, switzerland decided to lie on economic sanctions for major partners. so for instance, in ukraine, the swiss government was among the 1st to abide by ear sanction. but a switzerland has a low also on the exports of war material. and in the slow ways, weekly, it's stated that when switzerland sells or switch companies subs weapons to a country that come to wealth, transferred in this weapons to another country. it has to ask for theresa ation of the, the swiss government, in that case, for instance,

germany asked to pro, to re export nation for get portent to ukraine and to switch the government said no, because that would be a violation of its internal lo and that partially, you want relies on the principle of materiality, the principle of neutrality. a law, the trial it is say, states that a government, the sweets on forties could not provide weapons to a country of war for some to your grand. because that would be a violation. but swiss company could actually provide amunition, but there was a principle of equality off the treatment of belligerent and as the swedes switzerland, a took sanction against russia. do was off the u. then they had to this country had to apply the concept of reciprocity. that's why would someone conduct exports this weapon, but obviously that angered european neighbors. and there is indeed

a lot of pressure on because i'm trying to comply with that. and that has led to discussion our department. but so far, discussion have not led to any change in the policy because what you have to understand is that neutrality is both a security policy. freeman, but it's also part of identity. you know, what time is reading polls and on a yearly basis and this year, 91 percent of the population supports the trial at the end. it's part of sweetness reality. so relinquishing neutrality would be in a way about being part of sweetness, reality off suicide. entity, sorry you already, what would you say to the switzerland, the islands, the austria's of the world war of europe. what would you say to them as they remain? we can, we will establish, they're not completely remaining on the sidelines because in terms of values, they have actually chosen sides. and most of them are cited with, with ukraine. but militarily,

they're not taking sides. what would you say to those countries? well 1st and most, it's off to the irish people and switch people to decide how they want to organize their security and whether they want to join an alliance or not. we did not feel any pressure to watch us by nato countries. at any point in our history was our own own joyce. and the way i look at europe's need to bring back its military capabilities is it's all about building back the terrance. for us it means strong. did our ends in the back see a region where we are joining nature together with sweet and hopefully soon. but in today's world, i think everything can be used us. we see hybrid influencing

docketed to all of our countries. and there are so many ways that we can do more, more to gather even if countries like island or switzerland are not necessarily joining nature. we all need to work together, contributing to, to build more secure world when it comes to economic carson polarization. driven by this information disturbances and critical infrastructure and all of that we have seen by, by russia and china and some other other actors as well. well, the question i want to get to is, does neutrality work? or rather let me rephrase that. who does it work? for richard, you obviously are staunch proponent of neutrality. is this for the sake of ireland,

for the sake of europe, for the sake of ukraine and russia for the sake of humanity? who is it for? well, as i said, that the irish tradition of neutrality is intimately linked to the irish revolution and the struggle to, to end british rule. i mean, let's remember ireland was a colony of the british empire for hundreds of years. and the or stage was born in a revolution at between 19161921, which was both a revolution against bridget british rule. but it was also recently a movement of opposition to the 1st world war, where the entire world was divided into 2 kinds. and there was a horrific war which killed about 14000000 people. so ireland neutrality is deeply linked to opposition to colonialism and to imperial conflict.

geopolitical conflict between big power blocks. so it's not a pacifist at neutrality, certainly in the irish context, it's more about opposing big military powers and actually identifying with oppressed countries. so for example, there's enormous sol verity and sympathy in ireland with the people of palestine. people see it an almost automatic link between the irish history of a struggle against colonialism and at the palestinian struggle against the apartheid state of israel. and that was similar with the, apart with the movement of opposition to the apartheid state of south africa. so to was neutrality is not pacifism. it is not an indifference to political issues on an international scale, but it is a sort of positive opposition to big military powers and identification

with those who are struggling against colonialism and against imperialism. is alma, one of the arguments in favor of neutrality is that it can help the neutral countries to potentially be brokers of peace, or at least mediators. do you see any of the remaining neutral countries in europe? being mediators in the russia, ukraine conflict, whether it's switzerland, austria, malta, island, any of them? right? you're right, that said additional road of neutral states that what we call good offices and being a, a mediator offering the services that will allow later on to talk to each other. and it is through the end up canceling. it has been difficult for 13 because prison sports is both pretty life from the west. and so i but also from the russian side. nonetheless, that has been told and they are still growing up in switzerland among

not directly, but that involved a rush, sion and you train them to find some solution. and obviously neutral thing, we always provide a platform for negotiation, where it is true that the world has changed and you have new actors like per, like turkey in, in the current case, that's r. i could also play this route. but nonetheless, international system, you always need actors that are able to make a bridge between belligerents and that has been a traditional role of neutral countries. another mean that in the future it will not be the case, but it is india bit more difficult the said than it used to in the asked you already, i saw you, i don't think our viewers saw you, but i saw you shaking your head clearly. you do not feel positively or you do not feel not bullish on the chances that switzerland or ireland or any of the neutral

countries are going to be able to act as mediators. there is no room. i believe that at the moment for that and it will not be small countries like finland or any other small countries that will have the ability to access media media during this, this war. it's a full scale war and, and, and russ. it only needs to back up. i think we are, we are be tested all the time. i will in our abilities be military or are other other will, will, in their abilities are being tested and we need to raise the threshold, the price for those who are who, who are testing us. and we need to join our ranks so, so to say. but having said that, i very much feel about it's up to island and switzerland and austria to

choose their own ways. you already, it sounds like you're aligned with a famous principal of foreign policy, which is that you want peace. prepare for war. is that a good way to sum it up? indeed, i think that's about is the russian mentality of that they are testing soft spots and if they feel that it's soft, they keep on pressing. alright gentlemen, that's all the time we have today, but thank you so much for all your contributions. this fascinating conversation. you're already out of on in the markets, lee and richard boyd barret, thank you again and thank you for watching. you can see the program again any time by visiting our website. that sounds 0 dot com and for further discussion do good our facebook page at facebook dot com forward slash ha inside story. you can also join the conversation on twitter or handle at a inside story from me. several venue and the whole team here, like the news

ah 25 years after the good friday agreement ended decades of violence in northern ireland. u. s. president joe biden is to mount the anniversary with a visit to ireland. talk to al jazeera, we ask, who is really fighting? is russia or is it wagner, or is it the russian or military? we listen, we started talking to me on my own, so that this via i yours. who does it usually take them back. we meet with global news makers and talk about the stories that matter on al jazeera. it's a $1000000000.00 money known drink operation for coal mafia is bigger than the

company with financial institutions, regulators and governments complicit with it. right. i've described that in a 4 part series. al jazeera investigative unit goes under cover in southern africa, pittsburgh. we can fill 90 percent of the government while calling it's practically brandon good. part to on al jazeera, there is no channel that covers world views like we do. the scale of this camp is like nothing you've ever seen that the child care is what we were.